There has been a lot of talk of coach jump requirements. I amoung most of the general population on other threads feel that the jumps aren't enough and was told to quit bitching about it and do something. Sooooo here you go, I e mailed Gary Peek the central regional director. He said that uspa does know of the issue and has been spoke about to death in their S&T meetings. He said I could come address the issue at their next BOD (board of directors) meeting, but the ONLY THING THAT WOULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE IS IF MANY PEOPLE E MAILED OR CALLED THERE CONCERNS IN TO THE BOD OR THEIR REGIONAL DIRECTOR ABOUT THIS ISSUE. He also said that the uspa does not consider these forums as valid input from anyone so this is not a bithing thread, it is for those who do have concerns, and I have shown the way for them to be heard if they want it changed.

I don't know that I'd say "most people" don't agree with coaching at 100 jumps. Bill von said it best, IMO, that it's better than the blind leading the

In this thread it's pretty clear that even though you are a senior rigger, you might not have all the information you need to be correctly teaching packing. Does that mean you shouldn't be a senior rigger? Or does it mean that you've started on the journey of becoming a good rigger? Passing the course doesn't mean you're a good rigger, it merely means you have the skills to pass the test. Same with being a coach. One might not be a skygod, but they've demonstrated the skills that theUSPA deems necessary to be able to pass along basic information, help newbies have a jump companion, and someone to provide new jumpers with feedback. Had there been a good 100 jump coach available to watch out for me when I first started jumping, I'd have been much better off than I was with the 5000 jump skygod who was more interested in showing me how good he could fly, but wanted me to pay his slot anyway. I finally met some good jumpers without their coach rating that spent time in the air with me, and eventually in the tunnel with me. So, while a 100 jump person might not be the best, the 100 jump person is someone, and if they're willing to undergo the coaching eval and rating as managed by someone like say...Jay Stokes, who makes you work for it and doesn't allow any corners to be cut...then at least that person has demonstrated not only a willingness to teach, but an acumen and enthusiasm for doing so. There are bad coaches at 5000 jumps just as there are bad TM's and bad AFFI's. There are great low-number jumpers just as there are great TM's and great AFFI's. Personally, I'd like to see spelling tests and punctuation become part of a passed requirement for a rigging or AFFI rating, too. After all, communication is a significant component of either.

OK I've been sitting all winter at 33 jumps.I also have an hour of tunnel time.I consider myself to be doing well for that experience level.

Coaching someone when I have 3x the skill I currently have now, I find simply laughable.No way.It would be ridiculous. Could I jump with someone new and teach them something?Probably.I could possibly do that now.But Coach?No. If you had a choice between being coached by someone with a hundred jumps or a thousand who are you going to pick?Especially if you are paying for these jumps.It seems like there should be some step in between student and coach.Like learning how to skydive.

Your 1000 jump coach might be a world class flyer, but that doesn't make him or her a good teacher. Jump numbers are a poor measure of teaching ability. A 100 jump coach willing to put a lot into effort into a good ground prep before the jump will help you learn more than a coach turn back to backs who briefs you for 5 minutes before the jump.

The fact that coach courses accept and pass candidate that aren't qualified is the real problem. I had a discussion with another jumper about this and he had what I believe is a great idea. You should have to get a letter or recommendation from your DZO or STA to get into a course. There are plenty of 500 jump individuals in this sport that would make a horrible coach.

80 dollar coach jumps that put obtaining a license out of reach for many young jumpers are a problem.

The biggest problem of the coaching setup right now is that it is primarily designed to make money for the drop zone, and course designers, and helping new jumpers is just an after thought.

The coach has EVOLVED into making money for the DZ (not all but many). The Coach was intended PRIMARILY to bridge the gap between "Off Student Status" and "not licensed".

A coach and the "A" license card combined is a good thing for our sports younger jumpers to learn right from wrong. It is up to us as a group and us as older jumpers to ensure that the intent of the program is maintained. I like the letter idea. I had to get 3 for my Tandem Examiner Rating, so 1 for a Coach Candidate seems fair.

if you read 100 jump wonder/ coach you would see that people did fell it was and issue as well as did the whole uspa they questioned a lot if they should have even created the coach. I pu this on here so that others who were concerned about it could contact the right people. I also don't believe that 100 isn't enough for evryone but on my few years in I have seen some idiots who were w students. There is a gap and it needs to be shortened.

I don't disagree that not everyone is good at teaching regardless of skill.And high jump numbers will not make you a good teacher.I just question the skill level of someone with a hundred jumps being a coach.I know I can and have learned from people at this experience level, but not as a coach.I don't know why I'm posting anyway, at my DZ we all just help each other out.We are aware of are different experience levels, and ratings aren't worn like some kind of badge.We're all just skydivers looking out for one another.I guess I'm lucky to be at my DZ.

Best I can figure, the coach rating is a developmental position for the instructor cadre at a DZ. That means a coach is as good or bad as the instructors who supervise them, no?

If there are coaches out there without the appropriate skills, I'd look to the course directors and chief instructors that are allowing this to happen as the root cause. I know that both of the folks who signed off my coach rating would have failed me without hesitation if I didn't demonstrate the necessary skills - no matter what my jump numbers were.

Having the coach rating for a year or two before becoming an instructor helped me learn a lot from senior instructors. If people put as much effort into developing coaches as they do bashing them, it sure seems like we'd all be a lot farther ahead. How many times have you heard someone say: "...he's just a coach..." What kind of message does that send to these future instructors? What does that tell you about the person who said it?

So do something positive. Go work with a coach on their teaching technique. Be a positive example for them, and respect them for what they're trying to learn. Show them better ways to interact with students. Do practice jumps with them as the "student from hell". Give them tips you've picked up from your students over the years. They might even listen. And maybe, if you're good enough at developing them, they'll even buy you a beer after the sunset load.

The coach has EVOLVED into making money for the DZ (not all but many). The Coach was intended PRIMARILY to bridge the gap between "Off Student Status" and "not licensed".

A coach and the "A" license card combined is a good thing for our sports younger jumpers to learn right from wrong. It is up to us as a group and us as older jumpers to ensure that the intent of the program is maintained. I like the letter idea. I had to get 3 for my Tandem Examiner Rating, so 1 for a Coach Candidate seems fair.

Matt

I completely agree. Where it's different at our DZ however, is that coaches aren't paid. They may get their slot paid, but otherwise, it's just a rating.

>Coaching someone when I have 3x the skill I currently have now, I >find simply laughable.No way.It would be ridiculous. Could I jump with >someone new and teach them something?Probably.I could possibly do >that now.But Coach?No.

"Jumping with someone new and teaching them something" IS coaching. It's just a fancy word that means the same thing.

>If you had a choice between being coached by someone with a >hundred jumps or a thousand who are you going to pick?

A thousand, probably. Now let's say your choices are between the guy with 150 jumps with a coach rating and the guy with 220 who doesn't know how to spot or plan a dive, and whose idea of a debrief is "that was radical, dude! What the fuck?" Which one will you pick then? Because at many DZ's the choice is not between Dan BC or a coach with 100 jumps - it's a choice between several people with a few hundred jumps each. (The guys with 1000 jumps are often taking up AFF students or training.)

I don't think that skill is the primary issue here. The coach rating does not mean you are qualified to teach Arizona Divewerks the vertical move on block 22. It only means you have the basic teaching skills to plan a dive, take the guy up and debrief him. It's teaching skill, not flying skill, that the coach rating is all about.

I think the whole "if he can't fly circles around me he's a bad coach" thing is sorta missing the point. I mean, if someone with 2700 jumps jumps with a 100-jump coach, he probably won't get much out of it. But a jumper with 8 jumps is probably going to get a LOT out of that same coach. Is he going to learn how to back in on a 100 way? No. But might he learn to spot a bit better, or match fallrates a little better, or not backslide? He definitely might. And you don't need thousands of jumps to set a stable target for someone.

I agree with what you're saying.I'm happy to jump and learn from anyone, provided they have they the skills to manuever around my lack of skill, if need be. I just meant if I was paying for a lesson I would prefer to pay someone with more experience.

I just question the skill level of someone with a hundred jumps being a coach.

Is there something ironic about a jumper with only 33 jumps questioning whether some one is skilled enough to be a coach at 100 jumps?

Glad you said it before I could, Doug.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. 100 jumps is not someone with a ton of experience. But someone that has 100 jumps over the course of years is much different than someone who has 100 jumps in a short time span. Currency means a lot.

If you want someone to teach you advanced, world-class skydiving, the young jump numbers cannot help you.

If you want someone to teach you basic skydiving skills and safety then young jump numbers can help you.

And, of course, teaching skills and skydiving skills are two different aninals and the best world is the one where the Coach has both.

To all you Coach-rating naysayers, let me ask you. Was it better for the youngsters before the Coach rating came about or after?

I would venture to say that it is better now if for no other reason than, on the face of things, at least you know that the "teachers" have had some sort of testing and training. In a related sort of way, having an AFFI teach is better than having Joe Blow teach.

I don't think that anyone is arguing this point. Yes, it is better to have someone wtih you that you know had to go through some sort of training to get his or her rating. But, I do think that they need to raise the standards on how many jumps they need to have, obviously some people see this as a problem and if the standards were raised this would HELP close that gap.

This is why i believe on qualtiy over quantity. You can always bring coaches out of the woodwork if you ask. If not maybe the dzo should put on a course for qualified skydivers or pay their gas or somehting if they have to go somewhere else. I don't think that would be unreasonable.

So, what's the magic number of jumps and why? I'm not convinced that the jump numbers matter as much as the flying & teaching skill sets needed to instruct students well.

Also, wouldn't an increase to the required jumps for a coach rating both reduce the pool of coaches and cause more non-rated D-licensed jumpers to fill this vacuum? That's effectively shifting a portion of student training to non-certified coaches. Some of these folks may be great teachers, but that's certainly not a given. This seems to contradict your statement above that a trained & certified coach is preferable.